Robert Walker,
I thought you were being a wise guy with your previous post and responded accordingly, if I was mistaken, I apologize.
Some of your posts can be ambivilant or difficult to distinguish, and some have been sarcaatic with a clear wise guy theme, so if you were not trying to be a smart ass, again, I apologize. If you were, I stand by my response.
TEPaul,
You don't have to explain YOUR INTERPETATION of my posts, to Gene. I'm sure he can read and comprehend quite well.
I also hope you're not actively campaigning for support for your erroneous positions, are you ??
With the exception of my eyesight, and putting, I'm not frustrated about anything.
Well.... perhaps the DOU7BLE STANDARD I see here every now and then, but other than that I just enjoy debating posts, especially posts made without the facts, posts exhibiting favoritism, or unfair or mean spirited posts.
I also recognize that there are different STYLES of golf course architecture, and while I may greatly prefer the Golden Age architect's styles, that doesn't mean that every other golf course architects style is bad, especially those that don't emulate the minimalist or golden age style.
Lastly, when people have been able to prove their point, to demonstrate, with facts and logic, I've listened and changed my mind.
I've also admited when I was wrong, so I've demonstrated flexibility, and a willingness to learn and change perspectives. But, when people unfairly attack others and can't offer facts, or logic, but rely on preconceived preferences, emotion and biases, I'm unmoved, resolute in my beliefs.
You should consider yourself lucky to have friends like me.